DOCSLIB.ORG

Ecological Resilience Research in Practice: the Experience of the Barents Sea Ecosystem Resilience Project (Barecore)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ecological Resilience Research in Practice: the Experience of the Barents Sea Ecosystem Resilience Project (Barecore) ICES CM 2012/A:06 Ecological resilience research in practice: the experience of the Barents Sea Ecosystem Resilience project (BarEcoRe) Benjamin Planque, Grégoire Certain, Kathrine Michalsen, Magnus Wiedmann, Susanne Kortsch, Lis Lindal Jørgensen, Raul Primicerio, Michaela Aschan, Padmini Dalpadado, Mette Skern-Mauritzen, Edda Johannesen The BarEcoRe project investigates the resilience of the Barents Sea Ecosystem under global environmental changes. Studying resilience of marine ecosystems is fundamental in the current context of climate change and intense fishing pressure, but the theoretical framework and the practical tools to define, quantify and monitor resilience are still being developed. So far, the BarEcoRe project has studied several aspects of the Barents Sea ecosystem structure and function with a view to contribute to a better understanding, monitoring and projection of the resilience of this system. In this presentation, we report on the aspects of resilience that are specifically addressed during the BarEcoRe project. We present how some of the results of the BarEcoRe project can contribute to resilience research through either dynamical or structural approaches. This collection of research topics reveals the diversity of aspects that need to be considered for resilience studies conducted at the ecosystem level. Keywords: ecosystem resilience, taxonomic diversity, functional diversity, food-web topology, community structure, macro-ecological models, spatial distribution models Contact author: Benjamin Planque, Institute of Marine Research, POSTBOKS 6404, 9294 Tromsø, Norway. E- mail: [email protected], Phone: +47 77609721, Fax: +47 77609001 1 Aim anD scope of BarEcoRe What controls the resilience of the Barents Sea ecosystem? How does it vary with time and space? Can we anticipate possible future changes in the resilience of the Barents Sea? These were the general questions which motivated the BarEcoRe project which began in June 2010 and will terminate in May 2013. BarEcoRe, which stands for Barents Sea Ecosystem resilience under global environmental change, is a research project in applied ecology with the initial goal to evaluate the effects of global environmental change on the future structure and resilience of the Barents Sea ecosystem. BarEcoRe was initially structured around five questions: • What are the key characteristics of past temporal and spatial variations in fish and benthos communities and how are these related to past climate variability and fishing pressure? • How does climate variability and change propagate through the Barents Sea ecosystem and influences species interactions? • How can the combined effects of fisheries and climate modify the spatial distribution of plankton, benthos and fish species in the Barents Sea? • What determines vulnerability or resilience of the Barents Sea ecosystem and how will these be affected by possible future changes in climate and fisheries regimes? • Can we detect early warning signals and can we evaluate management strategies with regards to ecosystem resilience? Addressing these questions requires an appropriate combination of theoretical framework, numerical tools and field data. On the basis of the experience acquired during the BarEcoRe project, we report below what we have identified as the key fundamentals to study ecosystem resilience in practice. Ecosystem monitoring Monitoring multiple components of the ecosystem is paramount to investigations of ecosystem resilience. The Barents Sea benefits from a long history of monitoring, from physics to whales. During the last two decades the development of the ‘ecosystem approach to fisheries management’ led to an evolution in the recommendation for collection of oceanic data (FAO, 2003). In the Barents Sea, this resulted in the establishment of a dedicated ecosystem surveys in the early 2000’s (Olsen et al., 2011). The Barents Sea ecosystem survey turned out to be the essential primary data source for this project. The key elements of the data collection include: • Simultaneous collection of data across many trophic levels, including phytoplankton, zooplankton, benthos, fish, mammals and birds, • Collection of physical and chemical data, • taxonomic identification at a high resolution and with quality check, • large spatial coverage (>1 million square nautical miles), • Annual repetition over multi-decadal periods Practical approaches to resilience The literature on resilience is rich, spans a wide range of disciplines sometimes far away from ecology, and may not always be consistent with the way resilience is understood, defined and eventually quantified (Strunz, 2012). In ecological studies, resilience is usually broadly defined as ‘the ability of a system to absorb disturbances and still maintain structure and functions’. But such definition is too vague to be practical for applied quantitative ecological research in the Barents Sea. 2 In the BarEcoRe project, we attempted to classify concepts and metrics related to resilience according to their applicability in quantitative ecology (Planque et al., poster A:20, this conference). We identify a first class of resilience-related concepts that are often conceptually vague but useful to promote creative thinking, transdisciplinary exchanges, and participative processes for complex problem solving. These include for example terms such as identity, adaptability and transformability. On the other side, precision is necessary to ensure scientific rather than faith based thinking, to set the limits of validity of particular concepts and to ensure testability of concepts against empirical evidence. These criteria are used to define a second class of concepts of direct relevance to quantitative ecology. These can be further divided into structural and dynamic approaches to resilience. The structural approach to resilience relies on a couple of paradigms borrowed from the literature on diversity-stability relationships, functional diversity and trophic network structure. It is currently the only available framework allowing the use of the resilience concept in large ecosystems composed of hundreds or thousands of species. Structural studies of resilience are typically concerned with the measurement of diversity, redundancy and modularity of ecosystem components (Levin and Lubchenco, 2008). The dynamic approach to resilience comprises temporal analysis of systems close to equilibrium (as is the case for return rate and elasticity) or in transition between multiple stable states (e.g. tipping points, hysteresis and regime shifts). In practice dynamic studies are most conducted on small, closed systems which dynamics is well known and for which equilibrium points can be defined, usually on the basis of simple mathematical models (Scheffer et al., 2001). Examples of results Spatial patterns of biodiversity How to choose a proper set of metrics to describe the structural properties of the Barents Sea biodiversity, how to compute and aggregate them at a spatial scale consistent with management needs, and how to interpret them in the context of resilience? To address these questions, we analysed the spatial patterns of biodiversity across trophic levels and within and across benthic, demersal and pelagic communities, based on the Barents Sea ecosystem survey data from 2004 – 2008. The Barents Sea was geographically divided in several polygons, taken as homogeneous ecosystem sub-units. For each sub-unit, environmental and biological data were aggregated, and structural properties of resilience, i.e. biodiversity metrics, were computed. In addition, environmental descriptors including physico-chemical descriptors, productivity, zooplankton biomass, and fishing pressure where aggregated in the same geographical sub-units in order to provide the context within which biodiversity metrics can be interpreted. The use of several taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional biodiversity metrics was considered for 4 major communities: benthic, demersal, pelagic, and top predators. For each metric/community combination, total (γ) diversity within a polygon can be partitioned between α- (intra-site) and β- (inter-site) component, which can be interpreted as local and spatial measures of diversity, respectively (Figure 1). Additionally, topological properties of the food web were investigated, offering measures of the food web organisation within each polygons at the ecosystem scale. 3 Figure 1. Spatial distribution of Hill’s alpha and beta taxonomic diversity in the sub-regions of the Barents Sea for the demersal fish community (2004-2009). The preliminary, methodological results indicate that: i) Although there is a large range of diversity metrics available on taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional diversity, many where highly correlated. Multivariate statistics suggested that most information was retained by using a couple of metrics, one for the α-diversity and one for the β-diversity; ii) presence – absence data clearly lacked sensitivity in comparison to abundance data; iii) numbers of individuals and biomass data gave different biodiversity patterns. From a functional point of view, it can be argued that biomass is more important than numbers, and biomass is also more frequently measured than numbers during the survey. Hence, final analyses will preferably be based on biomass-data. iv) The use of polygons, identified to enclose relatively homogenous areas, provided a useful framework for aggregating the data across communities. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Multiple Stable States and Regime Shifts - Environmental Science - Oxford Bibliographies 3/30/18, 10:15 AM
    Multiple Stable States and Regime Shifts - Environmental Science - Oxford Bibliographies 3/30/18, 10:15 AM Multiple Stable States and Regime Shifts James Heffernan, Xiaoli Dong, Anna Braswell LAST MODIFIED: 28 MARCH 2018 DOI: 10.1093/OBO/9780199363445-0095 Introduction Why do ecological systems (populations, communities, and ecosystems) change suddenly in response to seemingly gradual environmental change, or fail to recover from large disturbances? Why do ecological systems in seemingly similar settings exhibit markedly different ecological structure and patterns of change over time? The theory of multiple stable states in ecological systems provides one potential explanation for such observations. In ecological systems with multiple stable states (or equilibria), two or more configurations of an ecosystem are self-maintaining under a given set of conditions because of feedbacks among biota or between biota and the physical and chemical environment. The resulting multiple different states may occur as different types or compositions of vegetation or animal communities; as different densities, biomass, and spatial arrangement; and as distinct abiotic environments created by the distinct ecological communities. Alternative states are maintained by the combined effects of positive (or amplifying) feedbacks and negative (or stabilizing feedbacks). While stabilizing feedbacks reinforce each state, positive feedbacks are what allow two or more states to be stable. Thresholds between states arise from the interaction of these positive and negative feedbacks, and define the basins of attraction of the alternative states. These feedbacks and thresholds may operate over whole ecosystems or give rise to self-organized spatial structure. The combined effect of these feedbacks is also what gives rise to ecological resilience, which is the capacity of ecological systems to absorb environmental perturbations while maintaining their basic structure and function.
    [Show full text]
  • Unifying Research on Social–Ecological Resilience and Collapse Graeme S
    TREE 2271 No. of Pages 19 Review Unifying Research on Social–Ecological Resilience and Collapse Graeme S. Cumming1,* and Garry D. Peterson2 Ecosystems influence human societies, leading people to manage ecosystems Trends for human benefit. Poor environmental management can lead to reduced As social–ecological systems enter a ecological resilience and social–ecological collapse. We review research on period of rapid global change, science resilience and collapse across different systems and propose a unifying social– must predict and explain ‘unthinkable’ – ecological framework based on (i) a clear definition of system identity; (ii) the social, ecological, and social ecologi- cal collapses. use of quantitative thresholds to define collapse; (iii) relating collapse pro- cesses to system structure; and (iv) explicit comparison of alternative hypoth- Existing theories of collapse are weakly fi integrated with resilience theory and eses and models of collapse. Analysis of 17 representative cases identi ed 14 ideas about vulnerability and mechanisms, in five classes, that explain social–ecological collapse. System sustainability. structure influences the kind of collapse a system may experience. Mechanistic Mechanisms of collapse are poorly theories of collapse that unite structure and process can make fundamental understood and often heavily con- contributions to solving global environmental problems. tested. Progress in understanding col- lapse requires greater clarity on system identity and alternative causes of Sustainability Science and Collapse collapse. Ecology and human use of ecosystems meet in sustainability science, which seeks to understand the structure and function of social–ecological systems and to build a sustainable Archaeological theories have focused and equitable future [1]. Sustainability science has been built on three main streams of on a limited range of reasons for sys- tem collapse.
    [Show full text]
  • Resilience to Climate Change in Coastal Marine Ecosystems
    MA05CH16-Leslie ARI 9 November 2012 14:39 Resilience to Climate Change in Coastal Marine Ecosystems 1,3 1,2, Joanna R. Bernhardt and Heather M. Leslie ∗ 1Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and 2Center for Environmental Studies, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island 02912; email: [email protected] 3Department of Zoology and Biodiversity Research Center, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z4, Canada; email: [email protected] Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 2013. 5:371–92 Keywords First published online as a Review in Advance on recovery, resistance, diversity, interactions, adaptation July 30, 2012 by 70.167.19.146 on 01/03/13. For personal use only. The Annual Review of Marine Science is online at Abstract marine.annualreviews.org Ecological resilience to climate change is a combination of resistance to in- This article’s doi: creasingly frequent and severe disturbances, capacity for recovery and self- 10.1146/annurev-marine-121211-172411 organization, and ability to adapt to new conditions. Here, we focus on Annu. Rev. Marine. Sci. 2013.5:371-392. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org Copyright c 2013 by Annual Reviews. ⃝ three broad categories of ecological properties that underlie resilience: di- All rights reserved versity, connectivity, and adaptive capacity. Diversity increases the variety ∗Corresponding author. of responses to disturbance and the likelihood that species can compensate for one another. Connectivity among species, populations, and ecosystems enhances capacity for recovery by providing sources of propagules, nutri- ents, and biological legacies. Adaptive capacity includes a combination of phenotypic plasticity, species range shifts, and microevolution. We discuss empirical evidence for how these ecological and evolutionary mechanisms contribute to the resilience of coastal marine ecosystems following climate change–related disturbances, and how resource managers can apply this in- formation to sustain these systems and the ecosystem services they provide.
    [Show full text]
  • What Role for Community Greening and Civic Ecology in Cities?
    Chapter 7 From risk to resilience: what role for community greening and civic ecology in cities? Keith G. Tidball and Marianne E. Krasny Introduction One of the greatest risks following a natural disaster or conflict in cities is the ensuing social chaos or breakdown of order. Failed cities, such as parts of New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina and Baghdad following war in Iraq, can be viewed as socio-ecological systems that, as a result of disaster or conflict coupled with lack of resilience, have “collapsed into a qualitatively different state that is controlled by a different set of processes” (Resilience Alliance 2006). Communities lacking resilience are at high risk of shifting into a qualitatively different, often undesirable state when disaster strikes. Restoring a community to its previous state can be complex, expensive, and sometimes even impossible. Thus, developing tools, strategies, and policies to build resilience before disaster strikes is essential. The Resilience Alliance has led the way in developing a broadly interdisciplinary research agenda that integrates the ecological and social sciences , along with complex systems thinking to help understand the conditions that create resilience in socio-ecological systems. Through consideration of diverse forms of knowledge, participatory approaches, and adaptive management, in addition to systems thinking, the Resilience Alliance integrates multiple social learning ‘strands’ (Dyball et al. 2007). Although the resilience work has not focused on cities, its approach is consistent with a call by the Urban Security group at the U.S. Los Alamos National Laboratory for “an approach (to studying urban ecosystems) that integrates physical processes, economic and social factors, and nonlinear feedback across a broad range of scales and disparate process phenomena” (Urban Security 1999).
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems Through Comparative Studies and Theory Development: Introduction to the Special Issue
    Copyright © 2006 by the author(s). Published here under license by the Resilience Alliance. Walker, B. H., J. M. Anderies, A. P. Kinzig, and P. Ryan. 2006. Exploring resilience in social-ecological systems through comparative studies and theory development: introduction to the special issue. Ecology and Society 11(1): 12. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art12/ Guest Editorial, part of a Special Feature on Exploring Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems Exploring Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems Through Comparative Studies and Theory Development: Introduction to the Special Issue Brian H. Walker 1, John M. Anderies 2, Ann P. Kinzig 2, and Paul Ryan 1 ABSTRACT. This special issue of Ecology and Society on exploring resilience in social-ecological systems draws together insights from comparisons of 15 case studies conducted during two Resilience Alliance workshops in 2003 and 2004. As such, it represents our current understanding of resilience theory and the issues encountered in our attempts to apply it. Key Words: resilience; theory; resilience application; resilience synthesis; resilience case studies INTRODUCTION SPECIAL ISSUE The concept of resilience in ecological systems was This Special Issue on Exploring Resilience in introduced by C. S. (Buzz) Holling (1973), who Social-Ecological Systems continues the expansion published a classic paper in the Annual Review of and application of theories and ideas about Ecology and Systematics on the relationship resilience in interlinked systems of people and between resilience and stability. His purpose was to ecosystems, with expansions into some areas of describe models of change in the structure and social science. Similar ideas appear to have had a function of ecological systems.
    [Show full text]
  • UFZ-Report 03/2005: Ecological Resilience and Its Relevance Within
    UFZ Centre for Environmental Research Leipzig-Halle in the Helmholtz-Association UFZ-Report 0 3/2005 Ecological Resilience and its Relevance within a Theory of Sustainable Development Fridolin Brand UFZ Centre for Environmental Research Leipzig-Halle Department of Ecological Modelling ISSN 0948-9452 UFZ-Report 03/2005 Ecological Resilience and its Relevance within a Theory of Sustainable Development Fridolin Brand Contents Preface List of Figures List of Tables List of Abbreviations 1. Introduction 1 2. Relevance of Ecosystem Resilience within Sustainability Discourse 7 2.1 Ecosystem Resilience & Limits to Growth 8 2.2 Ecosystem Resilience & Strong Sustainability 14 2.2.1 Ethical Idea 15 2.2.2 Weak versus Strong Sustainability 17 2.3 Ecosystem Resilience & Ecological Economics 23 3. Ecological Aspects of Ecosystem Resilience Theory 30 3.1 Conceptual Clarifications and Preliminaries 32 3.1.1 Definitions 32 3.1.2 Relevance of Concepts in Ecology 33 3.1.3 Stability Properties 34 3.1.4 Definition of Resilience 40 3.2 Background Theory of Ecosystem Resilience 46 3.2.1 Different Views of Nature 46 3.2.2 A Model of Complex Adaptive Systems 48 3.2.2.1 Adaptive Cycle 50 3.2.2.2 Panarchy 56 3.2.3 Alternative Stable Regimes 62 3.2.4 Stability Landscape 68 3.3 Resilience Mechanisms & the Ecosystem Functioning Debate 75 3.3.1 Biodiversity-Ecosystem Functioning Debate 75 3.3.2 Biodiversity-Stability Debate 78 3.3.3 Ecosystem Resilience Mechanisms 82 3.3.3.1 Ecological Redundancy 84 3.3.3.2 Response Diversity & Insurance Hypothesis 87 3.3.3.3 Imbricated
    [Show full text]
  • Social and Ecological Resilience Across the Landscape (SERAL
    Social and Ecological Resilience Across the Landscape (SERAL) Scoping Notice Stanislaus National Forest Calaveras, Mi-Wok, and Summit Ranger Districts Tuolumne County, California The Forest Service is seeking initial scoping comments on the proposed Social and Ecological Resilience Across the Landscape (SERAL) project. The SERAL proposed action has been developed in collaboration with Yosemite Stanislaus Solutions (YSS) with a commitment to getting vegetation treatments done that benefit the environment, the economy, and the community. YSS is a diverse group that includes environmentalists, conservationists, loggers, recreational users, Tuolumne County government representatives, and biomass industry representatives. The SERAL project is centrally located on the Stanislaus National Forest, within the YSS collaborative area, with portions located on the Calaveras, Mi-Wok, and Summit Ranger Districts (Map 1). The SERAL project area is located south and east of the North Fork Stanislaus River and north and west of the North Fork Tuolumne River (T2N-T5N, R14E-R18E; MDBM). The project area is also almost entirely to the north and west of Highway 108. Elevation ranges from 1,120 to 7,760 feet above sea level. Approximately 92,000 acres of the 116,692 acre project area (79%) are National Forest System lands. Yellow Pine/Dry Mixed Conifer and Oak Woodland are the predominant general vegetation types in the SERAL project area (Table 1). Table 1: General vegetation types in the project area (Map 2). All acreages are approximate. General Vegetation
    [Show full text]
  • Reflections on a Pilot Study in Adelaide, South Australia MELISSA NURSEY-BRAY, ELEANOR PARNELL, RACHEL A
    Community gardens as pathways to community resilience? Reflections on a pilot study in Adelaide, South Australia MELISSA NURSEY-BRAY, ELEANOR PARNELL, RACHEL A. ANKENY, HEATHER BRAY AND DIANNE RUDD Dr Melissa Nursey-Bray is Senior Lecturer/currently Head of Department and Dr Dianne Rudd is Senior Lecturer in the Geography, Environment and Population Department, University of Adelaide. Professor Rachel A. Ankeny and Dr Heather Bray, Senior Research Associate, are in the History Department, University of Adelaide. Eleanor Parnell is a graduate student of the Geography, Environment and Population Department and was the project’s research assistant. The corresponding author’s email is [email protected] Abstract Cities across the world are facing increasing challenges from the impacts of urbanisation, pollution and climate change. Green spaces and urban vegetation are at ongoing risk of destruction or removal. New residential developments rarely plan for or provide gardens. Nonetheless, the need to maintain urban green spaces is more important than ever. This paper discusses the role of community gardens and whether or not they have a role to play in enhancing community resilience to issues such as climate change. Using a case study of Adelaide, we present the results of a study on community gardens, concluding that they do offer the possibility of building community resilience and social cohesion as well as urban green space. Introduction At the turn of last century, Ebenezer Howard’s book Tomorrow: a peaceful path to real reform (1898) reprinted as Garden cities: a way forward (1902), presented a vision for the future of urbanisation and offered a suite of suggestions for how gardens and cities could co-exist.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Resilience, Biodiversity, and Scale
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Nebraska Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Research Nebraska Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Research Unit -- Staff Publications Unit 1998 Ecological Resilience, Biodiversity, and Scale Garry D. Peterson University of Florida, [email protected] Craig R. Allen University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] C. S. Holling University of Florida Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/ncfwrustaff Part of the Other Environmental Sciences Commons Peterson, Garry D.; Allen, Craig R.; and Holling, C. S., "Ecological Resilience, Biodiversity, and Scale" (1998). Nebraska Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Research Unit -- Staff Publications. 4. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/ncfwrustaff/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Nebraska Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Research Unit at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Nebraska Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Research Unit -- Staff Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Ecosystems (1998) 1: 6–18 ECOSYSTEMS ௠ 1998 Springer-Verlag O RIGINAL ARTICLES Ecological Resilience, Biodiversity, and Scale Garry Peterson,1* Craig R. Allen,2 and C. S. Holling1 1Department of Zoology, Box 118525, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611; and 2Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, 117 Newins-Zeigler Hall, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA ABSTRACT We describe existing models of the relationship redundant species that operate at different scales, between species diversity and ecological function, thereby reinforcing function across scales. The distri- and propose a conceptual model that relates species bution of functional diversity within and across scales richness, ecological resilience, and scale.
    [Show full text]
  • Refuges of Local Resilience: Community Gardens in Post-Sandy New
    Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 14 (2015) 625–635 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Urban Forestry & Urban Greening journa l homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ufug Refuges of local resilience: Community gardens in post-Sandy New York City a b,c d,∗ Joana Chan , Bryce DuBois , Keith G. Tidball a School of Natural Resources, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68588, USA b Environmental Psychology, The Graduate Center, City University of New York, New York, NY 10016, USA c Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA d Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, 118 Fernow Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA a r a t i c l e i n f o b s t r a c t Article history: Community gardens have historically played an important role in the social–ecological resilience of New Received 13 November 2014 York City (NYC). These public-access communal gardens not only support flora and fauna to enhance Received in revised form 10 June 2015 food security and ecosystem services, but also foster communities of practice which nurture the restor- Accepted 13 June 2015 ative and communal aspects of this civic ecology practice. After NYC communities were devastated by Hurricane Sandy in 2012, the topic of resilience has surfaced to the top of the city’s disaster planning Keywords: and policy agenda. This paper explores the role of community gardens in coastal “red zones” of NYC by Community gardens analyzing the meaning and relevance of community garden spaces in the resilience and recovery of local Civic ecology residents and community garden members post-Sandy.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Resilience and Sustainable Development
    ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS 68 (2009) 605– 612 available at www.sciencedirect.com www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon SURVEY Critical natural capital revisited: Ecological resilience and sustainable development Fridolin Brand⁎ Institute for Landscape Ecology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Am Hochanger 6, 85350 Freising, Germany ARTICLE DATA ABSTRACT Article history: The maintenance of critical natural capital is an important objective of sustainable Received 25 January 2008 development. Critical natural capital represents a multidimensional concept, as it mirrors Received in revised form 30 July 2008 the different frameworks of various scientific disciplines and social groups in valuing Accepted 19 September 2008 nature. This article revisits the concept of critical natural capital and examines its relation to Available online 23 October 2008 the concept of ecological resilience. I propose that ecological resilience can help a great deal in specifying the ‘ecological criticality’ of specific renewable parts of the natural capital. Keywords: More specifically, I suggest that the degree of ecological resilience is inversely related to the Critical natural capital degree of threat ecosystems are prone to. The concept of ecological resilience may Resilience complement other measures, such as integrity or vulnerability, in estimating the degree of Sustainable development threat specific ecosystems are exposed to. The empirical estimates of ecological resilience Strong sustainability add a further criterion in order to build a comprehensive and clear conception of critical natural capital. © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction being) ought to be maintained over intergenerational time scales. In this conception, natural capital and man-made Sustainable development represents one of the key challenges capital are viewed as substitutes within specific production of the 21st century (Sachs, 2005; Clark, 2007).
    [Show full text]
  • Supporting Ecological Resilience to Address Ocean Acidification And
    Supporting Ecological Resilience to Address Ocean Acidifi cation and Hypoxia Chan, F., Chornesky, E.A., Klinger, T., Largier, J.L., Wakefi eld, W.W., and Whiteman, E.A. The West Coast Ocean Acidifi cation and Hypoxia Science Panel Summary About this Document Ocean acidifi cation and hypoxia (OAH) together are changing the chemistry of the world’s This document offers a perspective developed by a oceans. Despite good evidence of species-level effects of OAH, we have little resolution regarding working group of the West Coast Ocean Acidifi cation and Hypoxia Science Panel (Panel) intended for a the scale and magnitude of ecosystem-level effects. Yet, such ecosystem effects are likely to broad audience. It provides pragmatic guidance about signifi cantly affect economically and culturally important resources, and the services and benefi ts the opportunities to incorporate ocean acidifi cation and that marine ecosystems provide to society. Focusing on the West Coast of North America, we fi rst hypoxia into existing ecosystem-based management ask how insights gained from the past decade of research can inform and bound our predictions frameworks as an important near-term and actionable of the direction and magnitude of the ecosystem changes ahead. Although abrupt and signifi cant strategy to ameliorate the likely impacts of OAH on ecosystem changes can reasonably be expected, predicting the timing of these changes (e.g., marine resources and ecosystems. The document is part of a suite of Panel products to inform decision- 1, 5, 10 years) and how they will manifest is challenging. We then propose that sustaining making, and has received input and review from the ecological resilience through the use of ecosystem approaches that are already embedded full Panel.
    [Show full text]